What gets Obama's goat?

The source has several hyperlinks of interest.

--S.


http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/06/22/what-gets-obamas-goat/

What gets Obama's goat?


Obama has been in office roughly a year and a half.  That's long
enough to get a handle on what motivates our president.  He's pretty
binary.  When he's not partying with rock stars, he's either apathetic
or angry.  Here, in no particular order, is a little list of Obama's
responses to both world situations and domestic policy initiatives
that have occurred so far during his administration:

Health care bill:  Apathetic.  (Yeah, it passed and, yeah, he made the
talk show circuits, but he was a follower, not a leader on this one.
The momentum came from the Democratic Congress.)

The Green Revolution in Iran:  Apathetic.  (Obama had the opportunity
to topple the Iranian government using the power of the Iranian
people.  Instead, after a prolonged silence, he damned the Iranian
people with faint, frightened praise.)

The Gulf Oil Spill:  Apathetic.  (Notwithstanding his promise to find
"some ass to kick" - a phrase that, with repetition, takes on weirdly
homoerotic connotations, or is that just me? - Obama has done little.
Alternatively, what little he's done, has been obstructive or
unconstitutional, without actually affecting that endless oil flow.)

The Iranian Nuclear Bomb:  Apathetic.  (Although that's not quite
true:  when he's not being frighteningly quiescent, he's been working
to water down sanctions against them.  That goes beyond apathetic and
veers into self-destructive, with America, the Middle East and Europe
as the "self.")

The cratering economy:  Apathetic. (Obama is making noises about
spending yet more of tax payer money to prop up his already disastrous
plans, but he's been remarkably passive about the whole thing, helped,
perhaps, by a frightened Congress that is now pretending there is no
budget at all.)

The Fort Hood Massacre:  Apathetic. ("What Fort Hood massacre?  But
while we're here, I'd like to give a shout out..")

The two front war (Iraq and Afghanistan) that America is engaging in
against Islamic jihad:  Apathetic. (Hello!  Is anyone home at the
White House?  As you may recall, despite meeting multiple times with
Andy Stern, of the SEIU, Obama didn't have time to meet General
McChrystal, who was running the Afghanistan side of the war.)

Continued Islamic jihad directed at the American home front:
Apathetic. (He's handed this one to Holder and Napolitano, and they're
just doing a wonderful job, aren't they?  They've now got the entire
Pentagon going through all documents with white-out to delete any
reference to Islam.  Obama remains apathetically above this fray.)

State efforts to stem the terrible criminal and economic consequences
of uncontrolled federal borders:  Anger (at the states drowning in
crime by and welfare claims from illegal aliens).

Israel's efforts to stem the terrible genocidal consequences of Hamas
on her borders:  Anger (at Israel, which is in the fight of her life
against entities whose sole goal is her total destruction).

The military's deep concern at the fact that the Obama White House is
mishandling our two front war in Iraq and Afghanistan:  Anger. And
this is the one that sparked my post.  Huge, earth-shaking things have
been going on around the world, and Obama has acted in a bizarrely
passive (or, sometimes, passive-aggressive) way.  But General
McChrystal does a rather foolish interview in Rolling Stone, and
suddenly Obama is all action:

===>

   President Barack Obama was "angry" after reading Gen. Stanley
McChrystal's remarks about colleagues in a Rolling Stone article,
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.

   McChrystal - the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan - has been
recalled to Washington to explain his actions to the president. He is
expected to meet with Obama in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Gibbs
said. Gibbs refused to speculate about McChrystal's fate, but told
reporters "all options are on the table."

<===


Any citizen should be shocked by this:  Obama will see McChrystal, not
regarding how to win a war as to which Obama is commander-in-chief,
but to give McChrystal a dressing down because the latter hurt Obama's
witty-bitty fweeings. We don't have a man in the White House. We have
a giant ego, unattached to morals, intelligence, strategic skills or
anything else useful.

My Mom told that that her retirement community which, judging by lapel
pins back in November 2008, went 80-90% for Obama, is having buyer's
remorse. They say that they had such high hopes for him, and he's been
such a disappointment. I tell her that we in the conservative
community were a large, howling pack of Cassandras, desperately trying
to get the truth out there - and we were roundly, and soundly,
ignored.

She also told me that the residents were so willing to give him a
chance, "hoping he'd grow on the job."  None of them seemed to have
figured out that you're already supposed to be grown when you hit the
White House.  It's not a practice job; it's the real deal.  It's
unnerving to see a building full of people who demonstrate that age
does not necessarily beget wisdom.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.